If you think that none structural proteins is a link you are sadder than I thought.

There is no connection. you know it, I know it. Not even funded by the same groups

That would be an integral part of the new appraoch now would it not? Either it is not such a novel approach or the two are connected. That means either they are not being truthful about the approach being so non-traditional or you are wrong in assuming there can be no connection. According to Occam's razor, you are the more likely candidate to be wrong rather than the people speaking of their own work.

_________________With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none” Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."Albert Einstein

So the researchers turned to a new idea: they picked a target in the virus that is less likely to change: an internal part, rather than the more traditional approach of picking something on the surface of the virus.

So the researchers turned to a new idea: they picked a target in the virus that is less likely to change: an internal part, rather than the more traditional approach of picking something on the surface of the virus.

No connection

What did they USE to target that internal part? The SAME non-structural proteins and viral transmitters. If you can get someone with a grasp of biology to explain that to you we would not have to see you try to pick small segments out to try to claim the lack of connection when the overall claims are the same.

In their paper the researchers describe how they adapted two adenoviruses to carry NS (nonstructural) proteins from HCV genotype 1B. One adenovirus was sourced from a rare human serotype (Ad6, human adenovirus 6) and the other from chimpanzee (ChAd3, chimpanzee adenovirus 3).

A common starter? So you are saying their new and non-traditional approach was not new or non-traditional, but "common" now? You honestly cannot have it both ways. The viral carrier of the non-structural proteins is how they targeted the interior rather than the exterior according to their papers. Now you are saying they mislead us in that regard?

_________________With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none” Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."Albert Einstein

Your idea of a new approach, the approach was where they targeted by boosting T cells. Usual approach was to target the outer layer, boost anti bodies etc

No connection, different funding and no citation of each other.

Keep plucking.

That is what the viral/non-structural protein approach did, the combination was to target the interior portions, not the normal external approach. If they used the same viral/non-structured gene approach for the inside and outer portions, how was it different?

The two papers were part of different studies related to the same basic research. The later clinical trials can have some different people and funding sources as well. The clinical trial would not have a reason to reference the prior research that was not clinical in nature and the prior research could not cite future research.

_________________With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none” Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."Albert Einstein

Yes, trying to get you to see that the same process will not give to different and distinct results so they must be connected is difficult when you really do not want to understand because that would involve admission of the truth about chimp testing.

Ignorance may be bliss but it is also evident in your approaches.

_________________With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none” Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."Albert Einstein

You are the one pointing out the use of nonstructural proteins is the new approach, no I, fact is it isn't.

No link

It isn't? Then pray tell what IS the new approach then? The use of adenoviruses? The use of adenoviruses to carry NS proteins? That is the extent of the options available from the papers detailing their non-traditional approach.

_________________With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none” Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."Albert Einstein